I realize that the thread below about the child being counted as part of the carry-on limit was ridiculous. That agent was totaly out of line.

I am curious though: Why do families with infants elect not to buy the additional seat? If it means the child will be more likely to live in the event of an "air disaster"; wouldn't it make more sense to buy the seat? Why the pain and agony?

------------------
CO757

I Agree 100%. Why is it that children must be restrained with a seat belt on the ride to the airport, but are not required to be restrained while on the airplane.

Many times I have experienced very hard landings and always wonder what would have happened if I was holding an infant when this happened.

I saw the original post last night, but I did not want to be the first to respond.

I feel very differently than each of you do and I do not have children and never will. That being said, I do not refute the fact that it is safer for the infant or toddler to be secured in his/her own seat. That's proven.

In my opinion, there is no valid argument to compare restraining a child in a ground vehicle vs. being restrained while airborne. Just think of how many hours a child, before the age of 2, spends in a car vs. on an airplane. The chances of serious injury or death resulting from an aviation accident is infinitessimal (sp?) compared to an auto accident.

While I think it would be great if the parent chose to purchase a seat for his infant/toddler, it is totally unreasonable to require that those hundreds of dollars be spent on the extreme unlikelihood that an injury/death would occur by being held when the injuries would be less severe or non-existent if being restrained in his own seat. It's simply cost prohibitive for too many young people with children under the age of 2.

I agree with Sheryl. As the parent of a child who travelled a couple times with a child under 2, I did consider getting an extra ticket for him. But as she points out, it was too cost prohibitive, leaving us with the choice of flying with him without his own seat or leaving him in someone else's care while my wife and I flew. The odds of injury or other problems were probably much greater had he not flown with us.
The same principle applies to car purchases; yes I'd like to be able to spend $20K+ on a new car with a 5 star safety rating to decrease the likelihood of my family being injured in an accident, but we can't afford yet to replace our 1990 Escort.
The problem, too, is that even if the child has his/her own seat, they aren't necessarily going to be in that seat when any potential problems might strike; those of you who have children know that keeping an under 2-year-old child strapped in for the duration of a flight is a recipe for an unpleasant flight for the child, the parents and the surrounding passengers. And, while having the child strapped in during takeoff and landing would be helpful, it is not the same as the need to strap in a child in the car. In the case of a car accident, one may go from 70 mph to 0 in a split second in a head-on crash, making it impossible for the parent to hold on to the child. Those situations don't happen on aircraft--except in those accidents in which being strapped in will not make a difference in the final outcome.
Yes, there may be some cases when being strapped in may prevent some injury, but they are few enough as to not warrant the extra expense for those people who cannot afford it.

We travel frequenty with our daughters, ages 3 and 5 1/2. Both always have ticket, usually award tickets. We bring the car seat for for our three year old for safety and parental control. It's much easier to deal with a temper tantrum when she is physicaly restrained in the seat. Also,she is more at ease as it is a familiar setting, and she can sleep without falling over. The only downside is carrying on more thing. We usually have one stroller stacked high with the car seat, diaper bag, cooler, kitchen sink etc, and make the kids walk !

If want to bring my cat and hold him in my arms then...enough of this discrimination against family members who happen to be non-human. For my Mancharian tiger - I will check him with cargo...he just won't stay on my lap.

Hasn't been an issue for us yet, but when the time arises, I won't travel without my kids in separate seats, regardless of the cost. (And by the way, I am as cheap as they come, and don't make big $$ by any stretch!)

1. Adult comfort. We grow 'em big (Patrick is 18 mos. old and over 35 lbs - all in the shoulders). Victoria (3 in May) is almost 40 lbs. She once climbed on my chest and fell asleep while I was napping on the sofa. I woke up 30 minutes later thinking I was having a heart attack!

2. Kid's comfort. The more comfortable a child is, the less fussy he/she is going to be.

3. Safety. The odds of anything happening are minute. Nevertheless, in the event of some nasty turbulence or a hard landing, they'll be exactly they should be.

4. Sleep. Our carseats have wings for the headrests. Patrick nods off within a couple of miles and sleeps comfortably.

5. Familiarity. New experiences can scare kids. The comfort of their car seat plus the companionship of their favorite blankie goes a long way to relieve stress.

When I bring Patrick to visit my mom, he doesn't sleep well in the portable crib. However if I put his carseat in the crib in a reclined position, he sleeps until morning.


------------------
"I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own."

Schutzee, at their ages, your children are required to hold a ticket. I'm curious though, before they each reached the age of 2, how many times did they each fly and did they always have their own ticket?

Interestingly, I have never been on a flight where a child who was obviously under the age of 1-1/2 had their own seat assignment.

I'm really stunned by the earlier responses by Sheryl and Griffon. I can't believe you'd be willing to take a crap shoot on your child's life (whether you have one or not).

I was recently on a cruise and met the captain of the Souix City DC-10. Did you know that some of the children that died on that flight might have been saved had their parents bought a seat for them!

I don't have kids either, but if and when I do, I will find a way to pay their way or I won't go!

I'm sorry for the lecture, but this really gets my dander up...especially when you consider what some people spend a year on their hair or nails or golfing or drinking....no wonder many of today's youth lack values!

While I agree that children should always be seated and safety-belted in vehicles, the "controversy" is the airlines fault IMHO.

The difference in taking a vacation or not (if you have small children) is often the extra $1000 or so it will take to get two kids on a plane with mom and dad.

Many arlines (CO included) have removed their reduced fare/mileage level for child tickets/awards. And I believe there's only one that still does a "kids fly free" (Southwest).

If airlines had a "children under 10 fly for $100 with a paying adult fare" People would buy the seats, kids would be safer, and airlines would make up any loss with the additional volume the policy would create for moms and dads.

My kids are 6 and 1, and I've always purchased seats for them. In fact its a pleasure that I only pay 50% fare for my 1 year old, because when my daughter was under 2 a domestic ticket was full fare. So now I look at it as if I'm saving money! Anyway, I don't understand why anyone would want to suffer holding their child for the whole flight (I'm cramped enough without sharing my seat), let alone put them at risk. As for the cost - its the airlines (or the Y and F travellers) that are subsidizing it now - a seat for a child at 1/2 off costs the airline the same as an adult ticket, but you pay 50% off! If cost is an issue stay at a cheaper hotel - take the bus instead of renting a car - skip a few dinners out, etc. - don't put your kids at risk.

CO757, I think I've read previously that you are a flight attendant. Based on your follow up post, it seems that people who share the opinion set forth by Griffon and me really bother you. No doubt that there are lap children on nearly every one of the flights you work. If this makes you so angry, how do you reconcile within yourself that some of the adult passengers on your flights do not purchase a ticket for their under 2 year old children? Do you realize that your strong beliefs may unknowingly influence how you relate to these passengers?

And as to "taking a crap shoot" with a child's life, I think it is very important to point out that allowing your over 2 year old children to play outside unsupervised has a far greater chance of them being harmed than holding your under 2 year old child on an airplane.

Back to the subject at hand. Do you advocate for children not being allowed onboard an aircraft unless they are ticketed with their own seat? What a burden to so many that would be if such a policy was in place.

I think NJDavid best hit the issue on the head: the airlines should have a 100 dollar fare for children traveling with adults. This way the children can have their seat (or putthem in a car seat buckled in the seat.

Best leaving this discussion to FLyertalkers like Jon Toner and NJDavid with children. I don't want to say something and start a flaming war but, I think it would be safer for a child in a separate seat instead of children flying through the cabin.

OMNI to Aubie: I flew once with Yaz and Eddie. They went on in their Shepra bags to Chicago, bags placed in the seat in front of me. We all got upgraded to First. Luckily all 12 people in First, the pilot and the F-A all were cat people and begged me to take the cats out. I said "I'm afriad to in case there's turbulance and the fur flies!"

But your other big kitty should get his own seat and his own F-F account.

WHY NOT let pets have FF accounts?


[This message has been edited by Catman (edited 03-22-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Catman (edited 03-22-2000).]

For previous related links/discussions see:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum1/HTML/000912.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum1/HTML/000305.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum1/HTML/000251.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum1/HTML/000268.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum1/HTML/000499.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum1/HTML/001654.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum1/HTML/002212.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum94/HTML/000209.html

Sheryl,
My oldest daughter, Katie, first flew at 4 months. We did not buy a ticket. We did bring the "bucket" part of the infant car seat, and luckly there were empty seats, so she was belted in. On her next flight, we tried first class, again with no ticket. This didn't work too well, as the armrests don't fold up. Since then, we have ticketed both children. It takes the same miles for four coach as two first class. When I haven't had enough miles, I buy Katie a ticket at the child discount. She is just shy of the 30,000 miles for her free ticket to Saint Marten.

I have seen some really giant "under two" children on flights. My little one, Sarah can pass for under two as she is really is little. But we want her in her car seat. The safety issue isn't about crashes. It's the turbulence, out of control service carts, and unsteady little feet. There are lots things on a plane that are harder than a childs head !